2008 Olympic Marathon Trials

scotth wrote:

Can you hold your breath another month?

IL RULES wrote:

Anyone know when USATF is going to make decision as to the trials location?

Translation: I know something you don't. Aren't I cool?

Wrong. Go back to Translation 101. In every communication I've seen on the topic, the date given to announce where the Trials would be has been early April.

The US has a trials race and it has often led to favorites not making the team but then being ready when the Games started. Most countries can choose their best team. Look at Seb Coe in the 84 1500. He was not ready to make the team at their trials race but won gold.

We want the best team for the games and we want to maximize the top athletes' chances of getting there. There has been much criticism, in the past, of the US not having a contingency plan (so to speak) to get the top athletes on the team. If Deena or Meb prove that they are our top distance runners and have a cold on trials day, they deserve to go.

I think LA 84 was John Treacy's 1st marathon and he won bronze (there were no A & B standards back then). The Irish OC picked him because he was their best runner. Look back at trials past and I'm sure there are favorites that did not make it because of circumstances beyond their control. Just like a college or high school coach, you pick your best and let them run. I would never run a trial to determine my top 7 XC ruunners and knock my top runners off the team because they were sick or injured that day.

agreed but USOC will not let USATF select its teams per your suggestion. It has to be a Trials - but are they (USOC) consistent ?? - ask Nancy Kwan.

I thought our trials system worked very well for Athens. With the exception that Dan Browne should've gave up one of his spots. That is the only thing I would like to see somehow changed.

Doeas anyone know what is the Olympic A and B standerd time for Qualification is? any help would be appreciated.

thanks in advance

Why should Dan Browne have given up one of his spots? Don't you mean Dathan Ritzenhein? Dan Browne (and Ritz) EARNED their spots. Period. Frank Shorter doubled in the 10K and Marathon. He is the one we should be modeled after. The man was our top three in both the 10K and the Marathon. Period.

I don't deny that Browne was one of our top guys in both events, but you can't argue he didn't run all out in the Marathon. What was his time again? 2:30+

Ritz was a bit selfish also. Browne should've stuck with the Marathon & dropped the 10k in my opinion.

read the thread - first page it is referenced.

did paul tergat not run all out as well, then? the athens marathon sucked for just about everyone.

i find it odd to call an athlete selfish when they earn something. maybe donnelly should have, i don't know, beaten dan or dathan at 10K if he wanted to run the olympics.

and, by the way, it's almost laughable to suggest that dan's 10K had anything more than a small effect on his marathon. he had 9 days to recover from a 10K.

No, that is the Trials qualfying standards on the first page, not Olympic.

Wyco Loco wrote:

Ritz was a bit selfish also.

Ritz did not deprive anyone of a spot. The "A" standard was 27:49 and no other candidate for that spot had even broken 28. If he didn't go, the spot would have been left vacant.

totally agree.......

You are correct - sorry.

It is not confirmed yet, but in all probability it will be same as 2004 - link below

http://www.iaaf.org/statistics/standards/xml=olympics_2004/index.html

nice try but wrote:

agreed but USOC will not let USATF select its teams per your suggestion. It has to be a Trials - but are they (USOC) consistent ?? - ask Nancy Kwan.

Wrong....

The USOC merely ratifies that the selection procedures are fair. USATF could propose that it would take the 3 fastest runners with a legit time from some date to some date. Many sports based selection on World Cup points or standings. The procedure just must be "fair" and open.

There is no requirement for there to be a single event that picks the Olympic team. The NGB is responsible for selection with some oversight from the USOC.

In figure skating, selection was based on multiple events and there was a provision for allowing an injured athlete to be selected (for just the reasons that are often noted). This provision was written several years ago. I am off on the timeline, but usually selection procedures are posted 2 years prior to the Games.

Not exactly so.

USOC insisted that USATF had an Olympic Trials for the Marathon. They want some consistency with how the T&F team and the marathon team are selected. It would be a bold move for USATF to fight USOC on this issue - as you indicate it is feasible, but I think unlikely.

scotth wrote:

Wrong. Go back to Translation 101. In every communication I've seen on the topic, the date given to announce where the Trials would be has been early April.

Scott, wrong. That is the latest communication. Earlier we were told the decision was to me made in the fall, then it was to be made at the convention, now it's April.

fuctoid wrote:

Scott, wrong. That is the latest communication. Earlier we were told the decision was to me made in the fall, then it was to be made at the convention, now it's April.

Any evidence of this from an authoritative source, Mr Fuctoid? Ha-ha...such a clever anonymous name.

scotth wrote:

fuctoid wrote:

Scott, wrong. That is the latest communication. Earlier we were told the decision was to me made in the fall, then it was to be made at the convention, now it's April.

Any evidence of this from an authoritative source, Mr Fuctoid? Ha-ha...such a clever anonymous name.

sure buddy. You can start with this link where Mr. Latimer promises a decision in December. I fI look a lttle harder (this took about 10 seconds) I'll find the reference to the fall

announcemehttp://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=926375&thread=925900nt.

Or perhaps you can do that yourself. actually I'm quite surprised. You usually know everything.